Jeb and Walker’s Immigration Double-Talk

The Daily Beast ^ | March 27. 2015 | Ruben Navarrette Jr.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Scott Walker and Jeb Bush were bound to collide sooner or later. It turned out to be sooner.

As the son of a Baptist minister, and the son of the 41st president of the United States, these two were destined to be the odd couple of the 2016 election. Walker is running against the establishment and the Washington elites. Bush embodies both. Walker will need at least $100 million to compete in the GOP primary, and more if he makes it to the general. Most of the Republican donors who write those kinds of checks are on Bush’s speed dial.

Bush could be successful in a general election but he first must survive what is likely to be a brutal primary battle for the GOP nomination. He’ll have to convince far-right voters that he is conservative enough, and those are some of the very people who seem so enamored of Walker. Small world.

The collision was over immigration. During a recent trip to New Hampshire, Bush was asked by a reporter if he believed the Wisconsin governor had changed his views on the issue to appeal to the far right.

“He changed his views on immigration,” Bush said of Walker........

What will the Walkeristas—not to mention assorted members of the Tea Party—say about that? Sounds like Walker himself has a pretty good idea what they’d say, because the same afternoon the Journal posted its piece, a Walker spokeswoman said, “We strongly dispute this account.”....

Walker and Bush certainly aren’t the only politicians on the planet who have altered their views on immigration.....

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I do not post in an ugly way.

But you appear to be very angry.

[ansel12]

The way you formed this thread to attack our top conservative is what is ugly, as ugly as the way you used to push Perry.

Why have you dropped Perry by the way?

[ziravan]

“I am not slamming him on this thread.”

You’re using a Soros’ generated publication that is over two years old that literally puts words in Cruz’ mouth by making inferences about what he meant - as your talking point.

And the point of the article was Sen Cruz’ opposition to the gang of eight. He didn’t state his position on deportation at all. He merely pointed out that what was stalling the bill was the insistence on a pathway to citizenship.

But you’re just trying to set the record straight. Gotcha.

You want to ignore three years of Cruz’ statements on the issue in favor of an outdated, biased article from the liberal Texas Tribune. Why?

I’ll tell you why. It’s desperately in your candidate’s interest to equivocate here: “See, everybody does it.”

Gov. Walker is my backup, so I am trying not to attack him.

On this issue, the NH meeting of two weeks ago, I’ve seen articles from not only the conservative blogosphere, but the MSM as well aka Wash. Post. There’s quite a bit of context to pick through.

Your response: this two and a half year old liberal rag’s interpretation of Sen. Cruz’ position is just as bad. To back that up, you cite a second article whose only input on the issue is to quote the first article.

You’re being disingenuous. What you are quoting is not Sen. Cruz’ position, and you know it, THAT’s why you had to go back 2.5 years and turn to Soros’ Texas Tribune to make your argument.

In the 2.5 years since the Tribune article, you can’t find one comment from Sen. Cruz that backs up your assertion. If you could, you would have posted it by now.

[Balding_Eagle]

I agree with you about the angry bit.

I can see the spittle at the corners of his mouth from here.

[ansel12]

Lol, you guys don’t indicate that the opposition to Cruz is made up of high quality freepers.

[Dagnabitt]

I will vote and donate to the candidate that pledges to undo all of Obama's fiat Amnesties.

So far, I'm sitting this election out.

[ansel12]

Yep, Scott Walker wants to grant the illegals citizenship.

Cruz is trying to give as little to, or take as much from, that movement, as is possible.

[BobL]

“Take from it what you will (or won’t). My point is the apparent hypocrisy from fellow FReepers about this issue - slamming Gov. Walker while ignoring the same positions held by Sen. Cruz. If you don’t like what Cruz said, then tell me what his stand on the illegals in the country is.”

Fair point...THEY ALL SUCK on this. They are simply scared to death to use the “D” word (deportation), so they have their various “solutions” that do not involve deportations.

But it all ends the same - if you don’t deport, but have to say what you’ll do - you can say “do nothing”, or you can say “legalize”, or you can say “path to citizenship”.

Since no one (that I know of) is advocating the first, then the difference is whether these Illegals vote (i.e., citizenship), or whether their American-born kids vote (i.e., legalize only). If only their kids vote, then transition from a 2-party system to a single party system (i.e., Democrat) will take a bit longer (maybe 10 to 20 years), but it will happen.

So, yes, I’m not happy with Cruz’s remarks, I would have preferred he simply kept it vague, if that was his intent. Now he’s taken much of the wind out of his campaign and made himself only marginally better than Walker.

[greeneyes]

I like Ike’s solution: It was called operation “Wetback”. Basically enforce the laws, and make sure to take them to the southern part of their country where it is not easy to get back in just an hour or so.

It was so effective, that the Government didn’t have to deport them all, because so many decided to just go back on their own (self deportation).

[Balding_Eagle]

Lol, you guys don’t indicate that the opposition to Cruz is made up of high quality freepers.

And you obviously don't realize truth is truth, even if it comes from the high quality opposition.

I notice neither of you made even the smallest attempt to refute Cruzes position.

On Immigration, Cruz Aims for Middle Ground

[ansel12]

The thread is about Scott Walker, who is for giving citizenship to illegals, it isn’t about Cruz who is against it.

Didn’t you read the article?

[BobL]

Yea, that was the “Romney plan”...of course he wasn’t serious, but it would work. Take away the goodies, they’ll go home. Mexico’s economy has been doing well, lots of jobs down there, and many will go home with some very marketable skills.

[greeneyes]

Well Ike’s plan was serious about enforcing the law, and when implemented, many decided it was better to go themselves rather than be dumped off a ship far away from where they might want to be or worse.

[Balding_Eagle]

That isn’t what the article is about, but it appears you are using the same debating tactics as Cruz himself, running away from the challenge.

For all I can tell, I’m debating the award winning debater, Ted Cruz himself.

[ansel12]

This isn’t a debating site, and yes the article is about Walker and Bush, and their immigration stances, Walker’s is citizenship.

[odawg]

“...is NOT something that has to be settled NOW.”

That amounts to code for amnesty.

[Yosemitest]

CRUZ or LOSE!

Ted Cruz, and Principles Over Winning, "Glenn Beck Program" ( 2:24 )


What You Need To Know About Ted Cruz ( 1:46 )

Take a good long look at where "Establishment Republicans" ALWAYS take us.

CRUZ or LOSE!

[Yosemitest]

So is CRUZ!

"Natural born citizen issue. "

Well, what does the law say?

The ABC’s of Immigration: Citizenship Rules for People Born Outside the United States

All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States (with the very minor exception of certain children of diplomatic personnel).
This is perhaps the only simple rule of US citizenship.
One of the most complicated areas of US citizenship law involves the passage of citizenship to children born outside the US to one or more US citizen parents.
While naturalized US citizens are treated like natural born citizens,
which includes those who are deemed citizens even when born outside the US, in almost every respect,
there is one important office that only natural born citizens can hold –– the presidency
(though expect to see efforts in Congress to change this if Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger decides to run for President).
Also, a person who is a citizen from birth cannot be denaturalized (though denaturalization rarely ever occurs).

The rules determining when such children are citizens are extremely detailed,
and vary a great deal depending on when the child was born since the laws changed several times in the 20th century.

...

What are the rules for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986?

Again, children born abroad to two US citizen parents were US citizens at birth, as long as one of the parents resided in the US at some point before the birth of the child.

When one parent was a US citizen and the other a foreign national,
the US citizen parent must have resided in the US for a total of 10 years prior to the birth of the child,
with five of the years after the age of 14.
An EXCEPTION FOR PEOPLE SERVING IN THE MILITARY was created
by considering time spent outside the US on military duty as time spent in the US.

While there were initially rules regarding what the child must do to retain citizenship,
amendments since 1952 have ELIMINATED these requirements.

Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen mother were US citizens
if the mother was resident in the US for a period of one year prior to the birth of the child.
Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen father acquired US citizenship
only if legitimated before turning 21.

So HOW does Ted Cruz's situation apply to this Law ?

Cruz was born on December 22, 1970 in Calgary, Alberta, Canada where his parents, Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh Wilson and Rafael Bienvenido Cruz.

Cruz's mother was born and raised in Wilmington, Delaware, in a family of three quarters Irish and one quarter Italian descent.
Eleanor Darragh, mother of Ted Cruz, was raised in Delaware, graduated from a Catholic High School (1952) in the U.S., as well as Rice University (1956), so clearly she meets the residency requirements.

Cruz's father, who was born in 1939 in Matanzas, Cuba, "suffered beatings and imprisonment for protesting the oppressive regime" of dictator Fulgencio Batista.

Source
... 74-Year-old Rafael Bienvenido Cruz:

"I came to this country legally," Cruz's father says.
"I came here with a legal visa, and ... every step of the way, I have been here legally."

In an interview near his home outside Dallas, the elder Cruz says that as a teenager, he fought alongside Fidel Castro's forces to overthrow Cuba's U.S.-backed dictator, Fulgencio Batista.
He was caught by Batista's forces, he says, and jailed and beaten before being released.
It was 1957, and Cruz decided to get out of Cuba by applying to the University of Texas.
Upon being admitted, he adds, he got a four-year student visa at the U.S. Consulate in Havana.

"Then the only other thing that I needed was an exit permit from the Batista government," Cruz recalls.
"A friend of the family, a lawyer friend of my father, basically bribed a Batista official to stamp my passport with an exit permit."

The Rafael Cruz that his son Ted portrays is a kind of Cuban Horatio Alger
— arriving in the U.S. with only $100, learning English on his own and washing dishes seven days a week for 50 cents an hour.

"Since he liked to eat seven days a week, he worked seven days a week, and he paid his way through the University of Texas," Ted Cruz says
of his father, "and then ended up getting a job and eventually going on to start a small business and to work towards the American dream."

Only he did that in Canada, where Ted was born.
His father went there after having earlier obtained political asylum in the U.S. when his student visa ran out.
He then got a green card, he says, and married Ted's mother, an American citizen.
The two of them moved to Canada to work in the oil industry.

"I worked in Canada for eight years," Rafael Cruz says. "And while I was in Canada, I became a Canadian citizen."

The elder Cruz says he renounced his Canadian citizenship when he finally became a U.S. citizen in 2005 —
48 years after leaving Cuba.
Why did he take so long to do it?
"I don't know. I guess laziness, or — I don't know," he says.

Peter Spiro, a legal expert on U.S. citizenship at Temple University, says Rafael Cruz followed "sort of a zigzag path to citizenship."
Spiro says Cruz's multicountry odyssey did not follow traditional models for immigration.

Watch these “YouTube Videos” and form your own opinion.



Ted Cruz, and Principles Over Winning | "Glenn Beck Program" ( 2:24 )


Ted Cruz is just getting started ( 4:33 )


Ted Cruz Announces His 2016 Presidential Run ( 2:06 )

[Yosemitest]

Need more AMMO ?

I quote FLIP-FLOPPER Scott Walker and his PRO-AMNESTY position:

Endorses path to citizenship for immigrant workers

Scott Walker distanced himself from House Republicans debating a new immigration bill by endorsing a path to citizenship for immigrant workers.Walker acknowledged that a substantial number of Wisconsin farms depend on migrant workers, some of them here illegally.
He also was sharply critical of how difficult the federal government makes it for those workers to come to this country.
"If people want to come here and work hard and benefit, I don't care whether they come from Mexico or Ireland or Germany or Canada or South Africa or anywhere else," he said.
"I want them here."
The Democratic-led U.S. Senate passed an immigration bill last week that features a path to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants already in the U.S.
Many conservative House Republicans oppose the bill, viewing it as rewarding law-breakers.
He said as a gubernatorial candidate in 2010 that he would sign an Arizona-style bill, which would allow local police to stop suspected illegal immigrants.
Source: Wisconsin Rapids Tribune, "Endorses path to citizenship" , Jul 3, 2013

Make it easier to enter the country legally

Walker said he is in favor of the Senate immigration bill--that features a path to citizenship--but called it a backward "Band-Aid" approach,
saying elected leaders should make it easier for people to enter the country and become legal citizens in the first place.
"Not only do they need to fix things for people already here, or find some way to do it, there's got to be a larger way to fix the system in the first place," he said.
"Because if it wasn't so cumbersome, if there wasn't such a long wait, if it wasn't so difficult to get in, we wouldn't have the other problems that we have (with people living here illegally)," he said.
Walker's stance on immigration reform evolved over the years.
Source: Wisconsin Rapids Tribune, "Endorses path to citizenship" , Jul 3, 2013

2010: stop suspected illegals; 2012: that's a distraction

Walker's stance on immigration reform evolved over the years.
He said as a gubernatorial candidate in 2010 that he would sign an Arizona-style bill, which would allow local police to stop suspected illegal immigrants, if he were elected.
Then, in December 2012, Walker said he no longer favored such a bill, telling reporters that such legislation would become a "huge distraction" from accomplishing his agenda for the state.
Today, Walker said he would support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants under some circumstances.
Source: Wisconsin Rapids Tribune, "Endorses path to citizenship" , Jul 3, 2013

[Cen-Tejas]

Maybe, but I still have an ounce of political naïveté left in my pail so I believe us conservatives just have to place our trust in Teds hands.